predict storage tank heat transfer precisely rev2

Art Montemayor January 19, 2009

of 16

Predict Storage Tank Heat Transfer Precisely Use this procedure to determine the rate of heat transfer from a vertical storage tank when shortcut methods are inadequate. Jimmy D. Kumana and Samir P. Kothari; Henningson, Durham, and Richardson, Inc. Chemical Engineering Magazine; March 22, 1982 Heating or cooling storage tanks can be a major energy expense· at plants and tank farms. Though many procedures for calculating such heat-transfer requirements have been published[1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10], the simplifying assumptions that they use can lead to significant errors in computed heat-transfer rates. This is of concern because efficient sizing of tanks, insulation, heaters, and coolers depends on accurate estimates of heat transfer to and from the various tank surfaces. And the ultimate value of accuracy increases as energy costs continue to rise. The procedure presented here determines the heat transfer to or from a vertical, cylindrical storage tank seated on the ground - like the one in Fig. 1. It includes the effects of tank configuration, liquid level, ambient temperature, and wind speed, as well as temperature variations within the tank and between air and ground. A partially worked example shows how to use the technique, and how to do the calculations on a computer. The theory Storage tanks come in many different shapes and sizes. Horizontal cylindrical and spherical tanks are used for storage of liquids under pressure; but all atmospheric tanks tend to be vertical-cylindrical, with flat bottoms and conical roofs as shown in Fig. 1. The example presented here is for the latter configuration, but the procedure applies to any tank for which reliable heat-transfer correlations are available. For the sake of simplicity, we assume that the tank contents are warmer than the ambient air, and that we are concerned with heat loss from the tank rather than heat gain. However, the method may, of course, be applied to either case. Consider, then, the categories of surfaces from which heat may be transferred across the tank boundaries: wet or dry sidewalls, tank bottom, and roof. In the context used here, “wet” refers to the portion of the wall submerged under the liquid surface, whereas “dry” refers to the portion of the wall in the vapor space, above the liquid surface. In general, the heating coils would be located near the bottom of the tank, in the form of flat “pancakes”. Therefore, the temperature of the air (or vapor) space above the liquid level may be expected to be lower than the liquid itself. Experience has shown that the average bulk temperatures of the liquid and vapor space may be significantly (i.e., more than 5 °F) different, and they are treated accordingly in our procedure. Use of different liquid and vapor temperatures is an important departure from the traditional approach, which assumes the same value for both.


of 16

Our basic approach is to develop equations for calculating the heat loss from each of the four categories of surfaces, and then add the individual heat fosses to get the total heat loss. Thus:


of 16

When using these equations in design or rating applications, we either assume the various temperatures for typical conditions or determine them by measurement. The area values are also easy to obtain:

942

84

7

6

21

22

2

dDD

A

DA

LDA

LLDA

r

b

ww

wd

The complications arise when we try to estimate the overall heat-transfer coefficients Ud, UW, Ub, and Ur for the four surfaces of the tank. For the tank geometry chosen, these can fortunately be calculated from the individual film heat transfer coefficients in the conventional manner, using published correlations. The overall coefficients Table I shows the component coefficients for each surface. The overall heat-transfer coefficient for the Dry sidewall of the tank (Ud) is calculated as the sum of the resistances of vapor film, fouling, metal wall, insulation (if any), and outside air (convection plus radiation). The outside-air heat-transfer coefficient (hAW) is a function of wind velocity as well as temperature gradient. Stuhlbarg[10] and Boyen[21 have presented data on the effect of


of 16

wind velocity and T. With a little bit of manipulation, their data were replotted, yielding the “wind enhancement factor” (W,) in Fig. 2. By definition:

)10(''Ar

Ar

Aw

Awf h

h

h

hW

Therefore, once the outside-air coefficient for still air (h'Aw) is known, the overall dry-sidewall coefficient at various wind velocities can be computed as:

'

1 1 1 111M I

d Vw M I Fdf Aw Rd

t t

U h k k hW h h

Similarly, the overall coefficients for the wet sidewall, bottom and roof surfaces are;

'

1 1 1 112M I

w Lw M I Fwf Aw Rw

t t

U h k k hW h h

1 1 1 113M

b Lb M G Fb

t

U h k h h

'

1 1 1 114M I

r Vr M I Fdf Ar Rr

t t

U h k k hW h h


of 16

Equations 13 and 14 assume that both the roof and bottom are not insulated, which is generally the case in temperate climates. We shall now review correlations for the individual heat-transfer coefficients needed to obtain the overall coefficients. Individual film heat transfer coefficients The film heat-transfer coefficients may be divided into four categories: convection from vertical walls, convection from horizontal surfaces, pure conduction, and radiative heat transfer. Within each category, correlations are presented for several flow regimes: Vertical-wall film coefficients These apply to the inside wall (wet or dry) and the inside wall (still air). For vertical plates and cylinders, Kato et aI.[6] recommend the following for liquids and vapors:

0.36 0.175Pr0.138 0.55 15Nu GrN N N

where 0.1 < NPr < 40 and NGr > 109 For isothermal vertical plates, Ede[4] reported the following for liquids:

0.25

Pr0.495 16Nu GrN N N

where NPr > 100 and 104 < (NGrNPr) < 109, and for gases:

0.400.40 0.47 0.67

Pr Pr0.0295 1 0.5 17Nu GrN N N N

where NPr ~ 5 and (NGrNpr) > 109 For vertical plates taller than 3 ft, Stuhlbarg[10] recommends;

0.250.75

Pr0.45 18Grh k L N N

where 104 < (NGrNPr ) < 109 Horizontal surface heat transfer coefficients These coefficients apply to the roof and inside-bottom surfaces of the tank. The bottom is assumed flat. For surfaces facing up[8]:

0.33

Pr0.14 19Nu GrN N N


of 16

For surfaces facing down:

0.25

Pr0.27 20Nu GrN N N

Both equations apply in the range 2 x 107 < (NGrNPr ) < 3 x 1010 Equivalent coefficients for conductive heat transfer The wall and insulation coefficients are derived from the thermal conductivities:

(21)

(22)

MM

M

II

I

kh t

kh t

The coefficient for heat transfer to and from the ground is the coefficient for heat conduction from a semi-infinite solid[9];

823G

G

kh

D

Fouling coefficients The coefficients hFd, hFw and hFb apply to the vapor and liquid at the wall, and the liquid at the bottom of the rank, respectively. These are empirical, and depend on the type of fluid and other factors such as tank cleaning. Generally, hFd is the greatest of the three and hFb the least, indicating that the greatest fouling resistance is at the bottom of the tank. Equivalent coefficient for radiative heat transfer The coefficient for sidewalls and roof depends on the emissivity of these surfaces, and is given by[8]:

4 4

0.1713 460 46024

100 100ws A

Rws A

T Th

T T

With these relationships, we now have the tools to calculate heat transfer to or from the tank. Example ABC Chemical Corp. has a single manufacturing plant in the U.S., and exports a high-viscosity specialty oil product to Europe. The oil is offloaded in Port City, and stored in a flat-bottom, conical-roof tank rented from XYZ Terminal Co. Ltd. The tank is located


of 16

outdoors and rests on the ground. It is equipped with pancake-type steam-heating coils because the oil must be maintained above 50 °F in order to preserve its fluidity. Other pertinent data are: tank diameter is 20 ft; tank height is 48 ft (to the edge of the roof); roof-incline is 3/4 in. per foot; tank sidewalls are 3/16-in. carbon steel; insulation is 1-1/2-in. fiberglass, on the sidewall only. XYZ Terminal Co. does not have metering stations on the steam supply to individual tanks, and proposes to charge ABC Chemical for tank heating on the basis of calculated heat losses, using the conventional tables [1], and assuming a tank wall temperature of 50 oF. The project engineer from ABC Chemical decided to investigate how XYZ's estimate would compare with the more elaborate one described in this article. First, the engineer collected basic data on storage and climate. Oil shipments from the U.S. arrive at Port City approximately once a month, in 100,000-gal batches. Deliveries to local customers are made in 8,000-gal tank trucks, three times a week on average. The typical variation in tank level over a 30-day period is known from experience. The ambient temperature goes through a more complex cycle, of course. Within the primary cycle of 365 days, there are daily temperature variations. However, in the seasonal cycle, heat supply is required only during the winter months, when temperatures fall well below 50 °F. Wind conditions at the storage site are not as well defined, and therefore much harder to predict. However, we can assume that the wind speed will hold constant for a short period, and calculate the heat loss for this unit period under a fixed set of conditions. The applied wind speed must be based on the known probability distribution of wind speeds at the site. The procedure for determining the annual heat loss consists of adding up the heat losses calculated for each unit period (which could be an hour, 12 hours, 24 hours, or 30 days, as appropriate). This example demonstrates the calculation of heat loss for only one unit period, 12 hours, using an ambient temperature of 35 °F, a wind velocity of 10 mph, and a liquid level of 50%. The other data required are given in Table II. Note that the liquid temperature is controlled at 55 oF to provide a 5 °F margin of safety. Since the Prandtl and Grashof Numbers occur repeatedly in the film heat-transfer coefficient equations and remain relatively unchanged for all the conditions of interest, let us first calculate their values. Thus, for the liquid phase:

3 23

297.5Gr

L g TN L T


of 16

Pr 484Cp

Nk

Similarly, for the vapor phase, Na, = 1.90 x 107 L3 T, and NPr = 0.28. We can now calculate the individual film heat-transfer coefficients, using the appropriate L and T values in the Grashof Number equations. This iterative process requires initial estimates for wall and ground temperatures, plus the wall temperatures. Coefficient for vapor at wall (hVw) As an initial approximation, assume that the wall temperature is the average of the vapor and outside-air temperatures:

Tw = (50 + 35)/2 = 42.5 °F Then find the Grashof number:

NGr = 1.90 x 107 (L - Lw)3 (TV - Tw ) = 1.90 x 107 (24)3 (7.5) = 1.97 x 1012

Employing Eq. 15, find the Nusselt number and then the coefficient (k = 0.0 151, L = 48 ft, Lw = 24 ft):

NNu = 0.138 (NGr)0.36 (NPr

0.175 - 0.55) = 921.1 hVw = (921.1)(k)/(L - Lw) = 0.581 Btu/ft2-h-oF

Coefficient for liquid at the wall (hLw) Here, neither NPr nor (NGr NPr) falls within the range of the applicable correlations (Equations 16, 18). Let us try both, again using an average for Tw:

Tw = (TL + TA) / 2 = 45 oF NGr = 97.47 L3 (TL – Tw) = 1.35 x 107

Using Equations 16 and 18, we get two estimates for the heat transfer coefficient (k = 0.12, NPr = 484):

hLw = (0.495 k/Lw) (NGr NPr)0.25 = 0.704 Btu/ft2-h-oF

hLw =(0.45 k / Lw0.75) (NGr NPr)

0.25 hLw = 1.415 Btu/ft2-h-oF

To be conservative, we use the higher value:

hLw = 1.415 Btu/ft2-h-oF


of 16

Coefficient for vapor at the roof (hVr) We consider this a flat plate, with a diameter of 20 ft and use Equation 20, again with an average Tw of 42.5 °F (k = 0.0151):

NGr = 1.9 x 107 D3 (TV - Tw) = 1.14 x 1012 hVr = (0.27 k/D)(NGr NPr)

0.25 = 0.l54 Btu/ft2-h-oF Coefficient for liquid at the tank Bottom (hLb) Assume that the ground temperature (TG) is 5 °F above ambient, and use an average of liquid and ground temperatures as a first approximation for the tank bottom temperature:

T = (TL + TG) / 2 = (TL + TA + 5) / 2 = 17.5 oF Then, figure the (Grashof number, and use Equation 19 to get the coefficient:

NGr = 97.47 D3 (TL – Tw) = 5.85 x 106 NGr NPr = 2.83 x 109 hLb = 1.05 Btu/ft2-h-oF

Coefficient for the outside air at the roof (h’Ar) Assume Tws = Tw since the roof is un-insulated, and get the coefficient for stil1 air from Equation 19:

NGr = 1.9 x 107 D3 (Tws - TA) = 1.14 x 1012 h’Ar = 0.663 Btu/ft2-h-oF

Coefficient for the outside air at the wall (h’Aw) Assume that the temperature drop across the film is one-fourth of the drop from the internal fluid to the external air (averaged for the wet and dry walls), and use: Equation 15 to calculate the coefficient:

T = 17.5/4 = 4.375 °F NGr = 1.9 x 107 L3 T = 9.19 x 1012 h’Aw = 0.51 Btu/ft2-h-oF

Conduction Coefficients for ground, metal wall, and insulation (hG. hM and hI) These are straightforward, from Equations 21-23:

hM = kM/tM = 640 Btu/ft2-h-oF hI = kI/TI = 0.224 Btu/ft2-h-oF hG = 8 kG/D = 0.102 Btu/ft2-h-oF


of 16

Radiation coefficients for dry and wet sidewall, and roof (hRd, hRw, hRr) As for the outside-air film coefficients, assume that Tws = TA + 0.25 (TBulk - TA), where TBulk is the temperature of the liquid or vapor inside the tank, if the surface is insulated. For the un-insulated roof, assume that Tws = TA + 0.5(TV - TA). Then Tws = 38.75 oF for the (insulated) dry sidewal1, Tws = 40 oF for the wet sidewall, and Tws = 42.5 oF for the roof. Using Equation 24, find the coefficient for each of the three cases:

hRd = 0.757 Btu/ft2-h-oF hRw = 0.759 Btu/ft2-h-oF hR = 0.765 Btu/ft2-h-oF

Closing in on results Table III summarizes the heat transfer coefficients just calculated, including the corrections for wind - h'Aw and hAr are multiplied by 3.3 and 3.1, respectively, based on data for 10-mph wind in Fig. 2. Substituting these individual coefficients in Equations 11-14, we obtain the U values listed in Table III. What remains to be done? When we began the calculations, we assumed that the outside-wall temperatures were related to the bulk fluid temperatures by:

Tw = TA + 0.5 (TBulk - TA) for un-insulated surfaces; Tws = TA + 0.25 (TBulk - TA) for insulated surfaces.

In order to calculate accurate coefficients for heat transfer, we must obtain better estimates of these wall temperatures. This requires an iterative procedure that can be programmed and run on a computer.


of 16

For dry wall, the rate of heat loss is given by all three of the fol1owing:

25d d d V Aq U A T T

26d Vw d V wq h A T T

27d Rd Aw d ws Aq h h A T T

Solving Equation 25 and 27 for Tws yields:

28dws V A A

Rd Aw

UT T T T

h h

Similarly, solving Equations 25 and 26 for Tw yields:

29dw V V A

Vw

UT T T T

h


of 16

Using the same approach, now calculate Tw and Tws for the wet wall, and Tw for the roof and bottom of the tank. To find the correct wall temperatures, use the initial estimates of U and h values in Equations 28 and 29 (and in the parallel equations for the other surfaces) to get new TW and TWs values. Table IV shows these temperatures after a second iteration. Using these new temperatures, recompute Grashof numbers, individual heat transfer coefficients and overall coefficients, and then iterate again to get a new set of TW and TWs values. When the current and previous iteration's temperature estimates are the same (within a specified tolerance), the iteration is completed. Table V lists the individual and overall coefficients after the second iteration. Although it is clear that additional iterations are needed, let us accept these values as sufficiently accurate for the present purpose. Then we can obtain the total heat transfer rate (Q) by using the U values in Equations l to 5 and summing~ Table VI shows the calculated heat-transfer rates through each boundary, and the total rate. Note that the roof and bottom of the tank account for only slight heat loss, despite being un-insulated. This, of course, is for the unit period of time, when wind speed is 10 mph, the tank is half-full, and the air is 35 oF. Table VII shows how the results of unit-period heat losses can be tabulated and added to get the cumulative heat loss for a month or a year. Of course, this requires climatic data and tank level estimates for the overall time period.

Rate of heat transfer during unit period Table VI

Surface U, Btu/ft2-h-oF Area, ft2 T, oF Q, Btu/h

Dry wall 0.1392 1,508 15 3,148.7

Wet wall 0.1655 1,508 20 4,991.5

Roof 0.1636 315 15 773.0

Bottom 0.0875 314 15 412.1

Total 3,645 9,325.3

Note: Total for 12 h period is 111,904 Btu


of 16

Summing losses for unit periods yields heat loss for 30 days Table VII

Period Liquid Level, % TA, oF Wind Speed, mph Heat Loss, Btu

1 50 35 10 111,904

2 50 27 5 392,407

3 43 42 0 42,591

- - - - -

- - - - -

- - - - -

42 93 55 30 0

- - - - -

- - - - -

- - - - -

50 56 48 20 12,368

60 49 60 15 0

Total for 30 day period = 8,389,050

Comparison with other methods Aerstin and Street[1] offer a very simple method for calculating heat loss from tanks, For a tank with 1.5 in. of sidewall insulation and a wind speed of 10 mph, the recommended overall U (based on k = 0.019 for the insulation) is 0.14 for T = 60 °F and 0.14 for T = 100 °F. Adjusting these values for k = 0.028 and T = 17 oF as in our example, yields an overall U of 0.206 Btu/ft2-h-oF. The total exposed surface is 3,331 ft2 (tank bottom not included) and thus, the overall rate of heat transfer by their method is:

Q = (0.206) (3,331) (17) = 11,666 Btu/h This compares with a heat loss of 8,913 Btu/h (for the exposed surface) calculated by the procedure of this article – see Table VI. Thus, their method yields a result 31% too high in this case. Stuhlbarg[10] takes an approach similar to that proposed here, but his method differs in how the outside tank wall film coefficient is computed. Stuhlbarg recommends the use of a manufacturer's data table, and does not explicitly distinguish between the bulk liquid temperature and the outside-wall surface temperature in calculating the proper heat-transfer coefficient. The algebraic method of Hughes and Deumaga[5] resembles the one presented in this article in many ways. However, it does not recognize differences between liquid and


of 16

vapor temperatures inside the tank, nor does it account for the interaction between �T and wind speed in calculating a wind-enhancement factor. Finally, even though their procedure requires iteration, the focus of the iterative efforts is to get better estimates of fluid properties, not tank wall temperatures. Conclusions Our engineer at ABC Chemical was able to negotiate a significant reduction in the heating charges proposed by the XYZ Terminal Co., which had used a shortcut method for its estimate, because the procedure presented here is rational and defensible. A rigorous solution of the iterations can easily be reached on a digital computer or even a programmable calculator, and the effort pays off in better design or operation criteria. References

1. Aerstin, F., and Street, G., “Applied Chemical Process Design” Plenum Press, New York, (1978), p. 121.

2. Boyen, J. L., “Thermal Energy Recovery”, John Wiley & Sons, New York, (1978), p. 285.

3. Cordero, R., The cost of missing pipe insulation, Chem. Eng., (Feb 14, l977), p. 77. 4. Ede, A. J, “Advances in Heat Transfer”, Vol. 4, Academic Press, New York,

(1967), p. 1. 5. Hughes, R., and Deumaga, V., Insulation saves energy, Chem. Eng., (May 27,

1974), p. 95. 6. 6, Kato, Nishiwaki, and Hirata, Intl. J. of Heat and Mass Transfer, (1968), p. 1117. 7. Kern. D. Q., “Process Heat Transfer”, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1950, p. 217. 8. Perry, R. H., and Chilton, C. H., “Chemical Engineers’ Handbook”, 5th ed.,

McGraw-Hill, New York, (1973), p. 10-17. 9. Rohsenow, W. M., and Hartnett, J. P., “Handbook of Heat Transfer”, McGraw-

Hill, New York, (1973), p. 3-120 10. Stuhlbarg, D., How to design Tank Healing Coils, Pet. Refiner, vol. 38, No. 4

(1959), p. 143.


of 16

Nomenclature

A Area of heat transfer surface, ft2; Ab is for the bottom floor, Ad is for the dry wall, Aw is for the wetted wall, and Ar is for the tank’s roof

cP Specific heat at constant pressure, Btu/lb-oF D Tank outside diameter, feet d The height of the conical roof at its center, feet g The acceleration due to gravity, 4.17 x 108 ft/h2 h Individual film coefficient of heat transfer, Btu/ft2-h-oF; hAW is for air outside the

walls, hAr is for air above the roof, h’AW and h’Ar are for still air; hLw is for liquid between the walls, hLb is for liquid near the bottom, hVw is for vapor near the walls, and hVr is for vapor near the roof.

hF Fouling coefficient, Btu/ft2-h-oF; hFw is for liquid at the walls, hFb is for liquid at the bottom floor, hFv is for vapor at the walls or the roof.

hG Heat transfer coefficient for the ground, Btu/ft2-h-oF hf Heat transfer coefficient for the tank’s insulation, Btu/ft2-h-oF hM Heat transfer coefficient for the tank’s metal, Btu/ft2-h-oF hR Heat transfer coefficient for radiation, Btu/ft2-h-oF; hRb, is for the bottom floor,

hRd, is for the dry wall, hRw, is for the wet wall, and hRf is for the roof. k Thermal conductivity, Btu/ft-h-oF; kg is for the ground, ki is for the insulation, and

kM is for the metal wall. L Total length of the heat transfer surface, feet

LW Total length of the wetted surface, feet NGr The Grashof number, (L3r2gT/2) NNu The Nusselt number, (hD/k) or (hL/k) NPr The Prandtl number, (Cp/k) Q Rate of heat transfer, Btu/h q Individual rate of heat transfer, Btu/h; qb is for the bottom floor, qd is for the dry

wall, qw is for the wetted wall, and qr is for the roof section. T Temperature, oF; TA is for ambient air, TL is for the bulk liquid, TV is for the

vapor, Tg is for the ground, Tw is for the inside wall, and Tws is for the outside wall.

T Temperature difference, oF t Surface thickness, feet; ti is for the tank’s insulation, and tM is for the metal. U Overall heat transfer coefficient, Btu/ft2-h-oF; Ub is for the bottom floor, Ud is for

the dry wall, Uw is for the wetted wall, and Ur is for the roof section. Wf Wind enhancement factor Volumetric coefficient for thermal expansion, (1/oF) Bulk fluid’s viscosity, lb/ft-h Bulk fluid’s density, lb/ft3 Emissivity


of 16

predict storage tank heat transfer precisely rev2

Documents